ArticleCureus2020
Clinical Experiences with Closed Incisional Negative Pressure Wound Treatment on Various Anatomic Locations.
Article in Cureus, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Challenging the Dogma of Dead Space Obliteration With Muscle Flaps in Deep Spinal Surgical Site Infections.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2025Article
- Closed-incision negative-pressure wound therapy (ciNPWT) to minimize wound-related complications in lower limb reconstruction after bone tumor resection: preliminary proof-of-concept study.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2023Article
- Closed Incision Negative Pressure Therapy vs Standard of Care Dressing in Breast Surgery: A Systematic Review.Cureus · 2022Review
- Negative pressure wound therapy in cases of spinal surgery and exposed dura: a case-based review.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2021Review
- Double Layer Reconstruction of Exposed Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices in Elderly Patients.Cureus · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Closed incisional negative pressure wound treatment (ciNPWT) is one of the promising methods for the prevention of complications in surgical incisions. The mechanisms of ciNPWT have previously been elucidated and in this series, we demonstrate various, as of yet, underreported uses for the technology. Our aim is to share our experience with ciNPWT on various anatomic sites with novel indications. Materials and methods ciNPWT was used in 24 patients. The mean age was 49.6. All the incisions were sutured, clean, and non-infected. Patients' sex, age, comorbidities, anatomic location of the wound, and the indications for ciNPWT were recorded. Results The mean number of applications was three per patient. One suture dehiscence after one session of ciNPWT was encountered in a flap donor site of an infant operated for meningomyelocele. Late-term seroma and hematoma formation were encountered in two patients. No surgical site infection, wound dehiscence, and ciNPWT related complications were seen in other patients. The majority of the applications were on the trunk, lower extremity, pelvis, upper extremity, and scalp respectively. Indications for ciNPWT utilization were preventing dehiscence, seroma, and hematoma formation in the majority of the patients. Conclusion ciNPWT is reliable and effective in the prevention of post-operative wound dehiscence and surgical site infections. It can be used safely in various locations and different indications for preventingcomplications such as preventing dehiscence in revision surgeries, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) fistula formation in the scalp, and wound breakdown in chronic corticosteroid use.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.